Comments on: Is Your Email Private? http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/03/31/is-your-email-private/ Reality-based political commentary Sat, 23 May 2026 06:14:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Michale http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/03/31/is-your-email-private/#comment-8248 Michale Thu, 01 Apr 2010 22:21:43 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1762#comment-8248 While I agree that our laws need to be updated, I really don't have a problem with the government reading our emails for counter terrorism reasons.. Personally, I think it is the epitome of selfishness and arrogance to think that MY personal privacy is worth more than a hundred innocent people's lives.. Or a thousand.... Or a million... Or just one... Michale...... While I agree that our laws need to be updated, I really don't have a problem with the government reading our emails for counter terrorism reasons..

Personally, I think it is the epitome of selfishness and arrogance to think that MY personal privacy is worth more than a hundred innocent people's lives.. Or a thousand.... Or a million... Or just one...

Michale......

]]> By: LewDan http://www.chrisweigant.com/2010/03/31/is-your-email-private/#comment-8247 LewDan Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:45:29 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=1762#comment-8247 The state of technology had nothing to do with the acts limitations. The Bank of America instituted the first general-purpose national credit card using electronic communications in the 1960's. It was well known to Congress that private and confidential electronic communications would be retained for years, if for no other reason than that in many cases IRS regulations required it. You also ignore the rather obvious point that there is no reason to sunset privacy protections other than to circumvent them. The real issue, as the founding fathers were well aware, is that our government, like all governments, is inherently untrustworthy and reluctantly relinquishes power only when and while forced to. The courts, the congress, and the president are not going to protect us. They never have. The courts, the congress, and the presidency are the tools we've been given to try to protect ourselves. The reason the act needs to be revisited is not because of technological advancements, its because enough of us now feel vulnerable and are sufficiently concerned to finally demand that our rights be respected. And the government, as always, will acquiesce no more than it absolutely has to and only as long as we're really paying attention. The state of technology had nothing to do with the acts limitations. The Bank of America instituted the first general-purpose national credit card using electronic communications in the 1960's. It was well known to Congress that private and confidential electronic communications would be retained for years, if for no other reason than that in many cases IRS regulations required it. You also ignore the rather obvious point that there is no reason to sunset privacy protections other than to circumvent them.

The real issue, as the founding fathers were well aware, is that our government, like all governments, is inherently untrustworthy and reluctantly relinquishes power only when and while forced to.

The courts, the congress, and the president are not going to protect us. They never have. The courts, the congress, and the presidency are the tools we've been given to try to protect ourselves.

The reason the act needs to be revisited is not because of technological advancements, its because enough of us now feel vulnerable and are sufficiently concerned to finally demand that our rights be respected. And the government, as always, will acquiesce no more than it absolutely has to and only as long as we're really paying attention.

]]>